E-V13 Frequencies and New Data

Everyone is a sockpuppet according to this dude, same schizo that accuses rrenjet of being E-V13 biased because E-V13 is not as high as he expected. It's barely 19%-30% and many are a bunch of medieval founder effects. The actual proto-Albanians probably had even less E-V13, around 12%-19%. Medieval founder effects have increased it to the level it is today. And notice how the guy gets so incredibly butthurt and triggered in his posts when someone posts something that is a bit different from his views and even starts to get personal. Like calm down, schizo. As per Matzinger, Albanian is related to Illyrian and Messapic and unrelated to Daco-Thracian.
 
Oh boy, you should be locked in a mental asylum honestly. You have spammed every social network with your bullshit around. Get a life.
 
Hawk said:
Let's see if that guy Kenneth Nitsche is really his paternal cousin. Of yes, he looks he was under E-V13 Z5017 CTS9320.
Click to expand...

I guess the different variants of Nietzsche are as common as some other highly commong German/Slavic names and without a proven genealogical connection, it gets difficult.
 
Riverman said:
I guess the different variants of Nietzsche are as common as some other highly commong German/Slavic names and without a proven genealogical connection, it gets difficult.
Click to expand...

They look as they post things out of context, just because of similarity of surname. I trust Farroukh more on his genealogy research, he is quite spot on.
 
Skeneta said:
If we are going by proto-Albanians then they would have had it even higher due to different geographical position from now but also because it seems that E-V13 came with the proto-Albanian speakers. Matzinger states that Illyrian is centum and Dacian/Thracian is satem. Proto-Albanian and proto-Messapian are half-satem.
Click to expand...
You can claim that with any lineage but the data on ancient DNA does not support your claims. Many E-V13 are recent founder effects and don't have in-group diversity. Meaning they had no importance in proto-Albanian unless their diversity has been lost. The E-V13 % in modern Albanians is not much different from the E-V13 in West-Central Balkan Late Antiquity + with some medieval founder effects so how could the E-V13 supposedly of been higher when it does not even show in the ancient DNA , such as in Timacum Minus and Dalmatian coast.

We don't have any inscriptions of Illyrian to know if it's centum or satem. Matzinger groups them into different groups. Greek is considered centum. Messapian was proto-Illyrian as the tribes in Albania-Montenegro from where Messapic came from (MOST LIKELY) were known as Illyrians in antiquity. Seems like a strange claim by Matzinger how Messapic crossed over to Italy but somehow disappeared in the Western Balkans. Illyrian was most likely Satem too or half satem like Messapic. Proto-Illyrian came from Yamnaya and not east alpine block like Matzinger claims. Sometimes Albanian is grouped with Greek and Armenian despite Greek being centum and the other being satem.
 
TheOne said:
You can claim that with any lineage but the data on ancient DNA does not support your claims. Many E-V13 are recent founder effects and don't have in-group diversity. Meaning they had no importance in proto-Albanian unless their diversity has been lost. The E-V13 % in modern Albanians is not much different from the E-V13 in West-Central Balkan Late Antiquity + with some medieval founder effects so how could the E-V13 supposedly of been higher when it does not even show in the ancient DNA , such as in Timacum Minus and Dalmatian coast.

We don't have any inscriptions of Illyrian to know if it's centum or satem. Matzinger groups them into different groups. Greek is considered centum. Messapian was proto-Illyrian as the tribes in Albania-Montenegro from where Messapic came from (MOST LIKELY) were known as Illyrians in antiquity. Seems like a strange claim by Matzinger how Messapic crossed over to Italy but somehow disappeared in the Western Balkans. Illyrian was most likely Satem too or half satem like Messapic. Proto-Illyrian came from Yamnaya and not east alpine block like Matzinger claims. Sometimes Albanian is grouped with Greek and Armenian despite Greek being centum and the other being satem.
Click to expand...

"Half-satem" is just a linguistic description for possible contacts. Messapians and Illyrians are descendants of a west Balkan group, but Daco-Thracians are not part of this block. Ancestors of Proto-Albanians belong in the first block and V13s became part of it directly or indirectly in different periods. V13 of Albanians doesn't have a single history, so it's pointless to discuss it as if it represents one population only. Some people here may not like it, but it is what it is and it doesn't change anything in history.
 
Messapians and Illyrians, a forced language tree that does not exists. Messapians shared 50% of their words with ancient Greek, linguistically that makes them closer to ancient Greeks, which implies they are Brygian derived, a people the Illyrians genocided.
 
Veriu said:
"Half-satem" is just a linguistic description for possible contacts. Messapians and Illyrians are descendants of a west Balkan group, but Daco-Thracians are not part of this block. Ancestors of Proto-Albanians belong in the first block and V13s became part of it directly or indirectly in different periods. V13 of Albanians doesn't have a single history, so it's pointless to discuss it as if it represents one population only. Some people here may not like it, but it is what it is and it doesn't change anything in history.
Click to expand...

E-V13 did represent a single people - or at least the vast majority of modern branches does - in a specific time frame. Just like R-U106 and I-M253 represented in a specific time frame Germanic lineages. However, in later periods they obviously mixed with all kinds of people, this mainly starts with Urnfield exchange, the Sea Peoples and the Cimmerian invasion. But even these events affected only a small minority of E-V13 lineages.

The larger scale diffusion started only with Scythians and Vekerzug culture, the Greek colonies and Hellenistic expansions, the Illyrian invasions of some of the Daco-Thracian territories. Therefore to give a date, around 600-400 BC.
From that time onwards, a truly significant fraction of E-V13 could have been in different people, but still the vast majority of the moderns were not.

I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of the modern branches was still Dacian/North Thracian and South Thracian up to the La Tene Celtic period and Roman conquest of these people. Only then, an ever rising number of branches became part of other people, until the majority was no longer Daco-Thracian speakers. Up to the Roman period the majority was still Daco-Thracian, mostly North Thracian/Dacian actually.

Before 1.300 BC practically all E-V13 branches were Daco-Thracian people - at most less than 5 percent were not.

The crucial dates are therefore:
- 1.300 BC (total majority still Daco-Thracian)
- 600 BC (first big dispersion of Northern branches with Vekerzug)
- 100 AD (large scale redistribution of Dacian branches, beginning of the end of the ethnic cohesion)
 
TheOne said:
I am J-L283 and for some reason they never responded when I wanted to participate in the project, they never added my results. So I just deleted everything. Waste of money. Might as well claim they are anti J-L283..... FTDNA is not that good, better test with something cheaper if one is going to test.
Click to expand...

I doubt they would intentionally ignore you. You should email them directly; their contact information is available on the website. Or, if you like, I would be happy to introduce you directly. Unless you share the same village, clan, and Y-DNA haplotype as another tester within the same exact family already in the project, results won't be duplicated, preventing any artificial inflation of data.
 
PaleoRevenge said:
Messapians shared 50% of their words with ancient Greek, linguistically that makes them closer to ancient Greeks, which implies they are Brygian derived, a people the Illyrians genocided.
Click to expand...

Your comment is a random, baseless post which you can't support with any source. You're just throwing random baseless posts at the wall and hoping that something will stick and then you expect others to treat your comments as if they bring something to the discussion. Post sources or stop posting comments which you can't support with sources.

Messapic-speakers didn't share 50% of their words with ancient Greek and there isn't a theory which supports or implies Brygian origins.

Just the facts: There are some samples from north and central Apulia and they are J2b-L283, R1b-Z2103 and I2-P78. The Illyrian connection is clear as the higher resolution branches which include just some of the J2b-L283s are the same as J2b-L283 of Illyrians.

Riverman said:
The crucial dates are therefore:
- 1.300 BC (total majority still Daco-Thracian)
- 600 BC (first big dispersion of Northern branches with Vekerzug)
- 100 AD (large scale redistribution of Dacian branches, beginning of the end of the ethnic cohesion)
Click to expand...
I don't agree or disagree because I'd have to wait for DNA evidence which AFAIK hasn't been uncovered yet, but I wasn't referring to the Bronze Age status of V13s. I was just referring to V13 of Albanians not having a uniform distribution date. Some seem to be older, others seems to medieval judging by their last common ancestor.
 
Last edited:
I have seen better acting in Bollywood, as if they don't chat 24/7 on their Discord channels. 🤣🤣🤣

 
Dibran said:
I doubt they would intentionally ignore you. You should email them directly; their contact information is available on the website. Or, if you like, I would be happy to introduce you directly. Unless you share the same village, clan, and Y-DNA haplotype as another tester within the same exact family already in the project, results won't be duplicated, preventing any artificial inflation of data.
Click to expand...
Nobody from my village has tested nor any relatives.
 
Regarding haplo percentages overall it’s hard to gauge them to perfection either with small scientific studies or projects that we currently have. There will always be sample bias because most participants are either targeted for a specific purpose or are just random people testing and joining them.

Like in Dibran’s case targeting his village and related people does skew the average. You can’t blame him for doing so though because is only seeking to unravel his origin. Or the other members targeting Bytyc, or me Thaç etc. it’s just the limit of these sort of volunteer run projects.
 
It's always refreshing to read archaeological perspectives from various countries, In this paper, Turkish archaeologists primarily examine the LBA-EIA cultural phenomena in and around Turkish Thrace.
For example, Cat.KOK. 1 (Fig. 11.1) must be a fragment of a crater, a ceremonial vessel. The cord-impressed diagonal lines, concentric circles, vertical hooked S-scroll rows, and chevrons also appear on EIA Phase I pottery at Insula Banuliu, Babadagh, and in southeastern and northern Thrace (Fig. 11, Figs 13-15), while analogies to the slip are known from the LBA Wietenberg Culture. However,

The thin cord-impressed motifs can be traced back to the MBA of the northwestern Balkans. The respective vessel types, with similar material and slip but new patterns, became widespread in northeastern and eastern Thrace in the EIA. Based on that, this pottery, similar to the Köprübaşı finds, can be dated to between the 11th and 8th centuries BC.

A vessel with a unique form and an impressed checkerboard pattern (Fig. 11.2) also represents a type that is rare in the region. Similar types can be found in the M/LBA Wietenberg culture, the EIA Babadag culture, and Troy, where such vessels were used as a mug, a double-handled drinking vessel, or a pyxis-like gift vessel. In terms of shape and decoration, the closest analogy of Cat. KOK.2 from Kokarca is an example found at Luduș, a Wietenberg culture site in Transylvania and dated to the mid-2nd millennium BC; besides, vessels with similar but incised decoration are known from the EIA settlement of Kozia-Sharna in northeastern Thrace.


Click to expand...

In many other archaeological studies, there is often mention of an eastward expansion of Earlier Hallstattian cultures, a view that Turkish archaeologists seem to agree with, especially considering that they do not identify any strong, contemporary cultures in the region that could have directly influenced the LBA-EIA cultures originating from the Middle Bronze Age to Early Bronze Age (MBA-EBA).

Given this, the cultural impulses must have come from the Balkan-Carpathian sphere, particularly from the South-Western Carpathians, encompassing both the northern and southern banks of the Danube.
 
Last edited:
Like I wrote, there were basically two pulse migrations from the Carpatho-Danubian sphere to the Eastern Balkans:
1) from Verbicoara-Wietenberg with Zimnicea-Plovdiv-Cerkovna (that's the Wietenberg analogies they write about) in the LBA.
2) Gáva-related Channelled Ware in the LBA-EIA transition.
 
TheOne said:
arbanology.substack.com

E-BY4465: a Look into a Proto-Albanian lineage

by Murr Dedi
arbanology.substack.com arbanology.substack.com

Thought I'd share this post from Arbanology on E-by4465 which has proto-Albanian diversity.
Click to expand...

To complement it, look at the available data from FTDNA as well: https://discover.familytreedna.com/y-dna/E-BY4465/tree

Going upstream, where it gets way more diverse with many Western, Central and Eastern Europeans, we got no ancient DNA samples up to about 900 BC.
The first available are being dated to the big LBA-EIA expansion with Channelled Ware around 1.300-1.200 BC at E-CTS9320. E-CTS9320 has also one of the biggest and most prominent Vlach branches under E-V13.
I associate CTS9320 with either Belegis II-Gáva and/or Vartop-Insula Banului, being a core branch in Basarabi and South Western Dacians.

It is remarkable that the fairly large branch uptream of E-BY4465 has not a single ancient DNA sample in the record up to now, contrary to the big Vlach founder branch, which has parallel and upstream multiple ancient DNA samples from Hungary and Serbia for example. This leaves completely open where E-BY4465 was coming from exactly,, though I assume it came from Basarabi too.
 
I got told that Daco-Moesian is primary candidate of Proto-Albanian ancestry with Illyrian substrate after they migrated in Albania. ;)

The satem-like affinities of Albanian and E-V13 presence ties all together.
 
Also, not entirely sure about this one, but there may be leaks about E-V13 presence earlier than LBA in Bulgaria, Ezero Culture is a likely candidate(not sure about this one), they are in pipeline in Reich.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top